Talk about a very profitable error to the (unintended) recipient :-)
If I felt sorry for the guy,I'd give the money back.If I think the guy's an idiot (like has a history of scamming/losing peoples money with poor quality code),then I'll keep it and he'll learn his lesson (sorry if that sounds unfair,but that's real life.People who do nothing wrong should definatly get the money back if it's a coding error though.I'll reserve the attitude for the scammers who deserve it)
Bankers profit all the time with bank errors,why shouldn't we? It's their fault we're in this mess.
If you don't like my opinion,then don't flame me,just say why not.
Topic: Exchange accidentally sent 512 bitcoins after coding error - page 3. (Read 35511 times)
This COMPLETE BS.....
The Forum Mods/Admins could have EASILLY stepped in and cleared up a few things beore this got so out of hand.
Do you have any idea how many New users signed up, just to find their way into this thread because of where it was posted originally ?
Moving the thread could have helped immensly and cut down on the OBVIOUS double and most likely TRIPLE accounts now possessed by some, who might have not wanted to join into the conversation with already established usernames/accounts.
Sometimes people just like to be given the opportunity to prove that they are perhaps smarter than the next guy and the Legal Debate which has taken place is also nothing more than those assholes giving themselves a pat on the back for a quote well posted.....
Now that there is nothing more, no more legal jargon to post.....PEOPLE COME UP WITH THE SINGULAR ENTITY SCAM POSSIBILITY ?
Tinfoil hat time......
Are you guys serious ?
It's been confirmed that ONE PARTY HAS MADE A COMPLAINT. The SECOND PARTY HAS ADMITTED TO HAVING THE BTC AND NOT WILLING TO GIVE THEM BACK.
Is this the extent that people are willing to go to make things right ? Nothing but legal quotes in a forum thread ?
This just blows my mind.
May all of you who posted in favor of the receiver, suffer the same or similar fate.
The Forum Mods/Admins could have EASILLY stepped in and cleared up a few things beore this got so out of hand.
Do you have any idea how many New users signed up, just to find their way into this thread because of where it was posted originally ?
Moving the thread could have helped immensly and cut down on the OBVIOUS double and most likely TRIPLE accounts now possessed by some, who might have not wanted to join into the conversation with already established usernames/accounts.
Sometimes people just like to be given the opportunity to prove that they are perhaps smarter than the next guy and the Legal Debate which has taken place is also nothing more than those assholes giving themselves a pat on the back for a quote well posted.....
Now that there is nothing more, no more legal jargon to post.....PEOPLE COME UP WITH THE SINGULAR ENTITY SCAM POSSIBILITY ?
Tinfoil hat time......
Are you guys serious ?
It's been confirmed that ONE PARTY HAS MADE A COMPLAINT. The SECOND PARTY HAS ADMITTED TO HAVING THE BTC AND NOT WILLING TO GIVE THEM BACK.
Is this the extent that people are willing to go to make things right ? Nothing but legal quotes in a forum thread ?
This just blows my mind.
May all of you who posted in favor of the receiver, suffer the same or similar fate.
Your mistaken, more than legal quotes are happening in the real world. You just aren't privy to the details of what extent people are going to to "make things right".
Thanks for your uninformed opinion.
Do you have any idea how many New users signed up, just to find their way into this thread because of where it was posted originally ?
No, but it's likely I don't even see them. Since theymos implemented the "ignore user" functionality I've started using it extensively. Some well trolled threads become almost empty of posts
This COMPLETE BS.....
The Forum Mods/Admins could have EASILLY stepped in and cleared up a few things beore this got so out of hand.
Do you have any idea how many New users signed up, just to find their way into this thread because of where it was posted originally ?
Moving the thread could have helped immensly and cut down on the OBVIOUS double and most likely TRIPLE accounts now possessed by some, who might have not wanted to join into the conversation with already established usernames/accounts.
Sometimes people just like to be given the opportunity to prove that they are perhaps smarter than the next guy and the Legal Debate which has taken place is also nothing more than those assholes giving themselves a pat on the back for a quote well posted.....
Now that there is nothing more, no more legal jargon to post.....PEOPLE COME UP WITH THE SINGULAR ENTITY SCAM POSSIBILITY ?
Tinfoil hat time......
Are you guys serious ?
It's been confirmed that ONE PARTY HAS MADE A COMPLAINT. The SECOND PARTY HAS ADMITTED TO HAVING THE BTC AND NOT WILLING TO GIVE THEM BACK.
Is this the extent that people are willing to go to make things right ? Nothing but legal quotes in a forum thread ?
This just blows my mind.
May all of you who posted in favor of the receiver, suffer the same or similar fate.
The Forum Mods/Admins could have EASILLY stepped in and cleared up a few things beore this got so out of hand.
Do you have any idea how many New users signed up, just to find their way into this thread because of where it was posted originally ?
Moving the thread could have helped immensly and cut down on the OBVIOUS double and most likely TRIPLE accounts now possessed by some, who might have not wanted to join into the conversation with already established usernames/accounts.
Sometimes people just like to be given the opportunity to prove that they are perhaps smarter than the next guy and the Legal Debate which has taken place is also nothing more than those assholes giving themselves a pat on the back for a quote well posted.....
Now that there is nothing more, no more legal jargon to post.....PEOPLE COME UP WITH THE SINGULAR ENTITY SCAM POSSIBILITY ?
Tinfoil hat time......
Are you guys serious ?
It's been confirmed that ONE PARTY HAS MADE A COMPLAINT. The SECOND PARTY HAS ADMITTED TO HAVING THE BTC AND NOT WILLING TO GIVE THEM BACK.
Is this the extent that people are willing to go to make things right ? Nothing but legal quotes in a forum thread ?
This just blows my mind.
May all of you who posted in favor of the receiver, suffer the same or similar fate.
Gillette came out with Occam's Mach 3 Turbo EXTREME Razor which is a little more complex and has more moving philosophies than its predecessor for a much closer shave in thought.
Heh, Occam's Razor slashes Gordian Knot. Film at 11.
Who's presenting these choices? You, you SA plant. Yes I've been to SA and know you're using an alias similar to Rick Lowtax Kyanka.
Cease and desist!
Cease and desist!
Feel free to post again when you understand your own writings 
(And have new evidence. "There might be things we don't know" isn't)
(And have new evidence. "There might be things we don't know" isn't)
Irrelevant. Occam's razor is simply the simplest choice out of the many choices presented.
OK, so you have multiple Occam's compliant explanations.
=
Quote
Occam's Razor is great and all but it's subject to revision with new evidence.
Feel free to post again when you understand your own writings
(And have new evidence. "There might be things we don't know" isn't)
Gillette came out with Occam's Mach 3 Turbo EXTREME Razor which is a little more complex and has more moving philosophies than its predecessor for a much closer shave in thought.
Dude, I like Occam's razor too. Care to explain MyBitcoin in terms of Occam's Razor?
It's hardly relevant to the thread, but sure. Scam from the beginning to the end, as shown by the extreme caution being taken by the operator in setting everything up through anonymous proxies (not only network, but registration etc). I'm impressed by the foresight though.
(The only other logical explanation that would be Occam-compliant was that the operator had had an accident, but than one fell through by the mysterious come back and 49%-promise)
OK, so you have multiple Occam's compliant explanations.
However...
Occam's Razor is great and all but it's subject to revision with new evidence. One of the problems here is the source of the evidence which also constitutes a "known fact,"or in this case, a "known unknown." We've seen the chat log. Great. We know what it says. But, we know that we do NOT know what the relationship is between BenDavis and Intersango. We know what the chat says, but we also know that we do NOT know the relationship between any claim in the chatlog and factual evidence except for the 512 1 BTC transfers that can be tracked. We have no 'known fact' of intersango's ignorance of the code, but only knowledge of the claim. If this claim happens to be false, then it is in alignment with Occam's Razor (since scammers lie) and if the claim is true, it is still in alignment.
Unfortunately, a scenario such as this isn't the best place for Occam's Razor.
Dude, I like Occam's razor too. Care to explain MyBitcoin in terms of Occam's Razor?
It's hardly relevant to the thread, but sure. Scam from the beginning to the end, as shown by the extreme caution being taken by the operator in setting everything up through anonymous proxies (not only network, but registration etc). I'm impressed by the foresight though.
(The only other logical explanation that would be Occam-compliant was that the operator had had an accident, but than one fell through by the mysterious come back and 49%-promise)
I tried shaving with Occam's Razor and I cut myself.
@stalin-chan I stand corrected.
On separate matter: Poor BenDavis was forced into a situation where his moral character was put on the line. He has to choose to return the 511 BTC or keep it -- both of these decisions can lead to serious regrets -- give the BTC back, and regret spending it for being weak (nice guys finish last etc etc) -- or keep the money and lose your moral character to the ideal of becoming a thief. Being human, these are not easy decisions to make for all people. A happy compromise might have been to return most of it (two thirds for example), and keep the remainder as compensation for the heartache of deciding.
If you do read this Ben, I hope you are able to reconsider and give a portion back -- I get the feeling this chapter is closed though for now.
phantomcircuit I hope you can bounce back from this, and make your business more successful then even you hoped before.
On separate matter: Poor BenDavis was forced into a situation where his moral character was put on the line. He has to choose to return the 511 BTC or keep it -- both of these decisions can lead to serious regrets -- give the BTC back, and regret spending it for being weak (nice guys finish last etc etc) -- or keep the money and lose your moral character to the ideal of becoming a thief. Being human, these are not easy decisions to make for all people. A happy compromise might have been to return most of it (two thirds for example), and keep the remainder as compensation for the heartache of deciding.
If you do read this Ben, I hope you are able to reconsider and give a portion back -- I get the feeling this chapter is closed though for now.
phantomcircuit I hope you can bounce back from this, and make your business more successful then even you hoped before.
If he sold around $8, he could buy back now, give back 511 (or some percentage) and keep 50 or so he made on exchange.
And as it was already said before, this can very well be a scam of the exchange
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Occam's_razor would disagree with you. The simplest explanation that fit all the known facts are for Intersango to have by mistake sent bitcoins to someone who ignorant of the law sold them and now has been told by his lawyer to shut up.
Any other explanation is a lot more complicated where the end benefit for anyone involved is much less likely - even doubtful.
Dude, I like Occam's razor too. Care to explain MyBitcoin in terms of Occam's Razor?
The currency is NOT totally anonymous unless certain steps are taken you connect your reputation to an identify on almost all the current ways of trading bitcoin. With certain tumblers and what not you can achieve almost total anonymity but not absolute because of the traceable nature of transactions. It is you who are clueless if you think bitcoin is completely anon.
Oh, so you can track people through their wallet addresses? You can find out who created a wallet address and when? You can see how many addresses a person has and which belong to him?
relevant paper by fergal reid: http://arxiv.org/pdf/1107.4524v1, should answer these questions.
Seems a bit much for a measly 512 coins. If they were going to try and pull that scam might as well claim the whole exchange was lost. Plus didn't he say they were covering the loss?
Does that not put this theory to rest?
Does that not put this theory to rest?
And? Make it look like an error, people believe it->go away with money.
After all we are in the bitcoin world
After all we are in the bitcoin world
Ok, a couple people have made this crazy-sounding claim, and it's a little sketchy. How exactly does the exchange make money by pretending to have accidentally sent money to a fictitious person?
Make it look like an error, people believe it->go away with money.
Skepticism always welcome. I like your train of thought, but the argument is still lacking. My argument against your idea so far is that:
[1] As a natural speaker of English, the IRC conversation looks *very* legitimate. The back and forth looks like it is genuinely two separate people (opinion only)
[2] If sango doesn't compensate the loss to his clients, will his business survive? Will the bad reputation caused by this incident kill the business? Is it worth to kill the business for 511BTC?
[3] As per defxor, Occam's razor would place the burden on you to convince otherwise. Until then, simplest explanation to fit with facts will be most believable. Maybe search for some more facts and you can make your claim seem more persuasive.
And? Make it look like an error, people believe it->go away with money.
After all we are in the bitcoin world
After all we are in the bitcoin world
And as it was already said before, this can very well be a scam of the exchange
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Occam's_razor would disagree with you. The simplest explanation that fit all the known facts are for Intersango to have by mistake sent bitcoins to someone who ignorant of the law sold them and now has been told by his lawyer to shut up.
Any other explanation is a lot more complicated where the end benefit for anyone involved is much less likely - even doubtful.
Jump to: